CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 06 Civ. 4880(PKC)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2009

Swarna v. Al-Awadi

Plaintiff Swarna Vishranthamma sued her former employers, Badar Al-Awadi and Halal Muhammad Al-Shaitan (Individual Defendants), and the State of Kuwait for slavery and slavery-like practices under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) and for labor law violations. The Individual Defendants claimed diplomatic immunity, and Kuwait claimed sovereign immunity. The court ruled that the Individual Defendants' alleged actions were private acts, not official diplomatic functions, thus denying them residual diplomatic immunity for both ATCA and labor law claims. Conversely, Kuwait was granted sovereign immunity from the labor law claims, as it was not the direct employer, and its financial support to the diplomat was deemed a sovereign act. Kuwait also retained immunity from the ATCA claims, as the diplomat's tortious acts were outside the scope of employment, and claims of ratification/aiding and abetting involved discretionary governmental functions. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a default judgment against the Individual Defendants but denied it against the State of Kuwait, dismissing all claims against Kuwait for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Diplomatic ImmunitySovereign ImmunityAlien Tort Claims ActForced LaborInvoluntary ServitudeHuman TraffickingSexual SlaveryDefault JudgmentEmployment LawVicarious Liability
References
59
Case No. 09-01510-r
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 2010

Ace American Insurance v. DPH Holdings Corp. (In Re DPH Holdings Corp.)

The State of Michigan Workers’ Compensation Insurance Agency and Funds Administration (Michigan Defendants) appealed an order from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, which denied their motion to dismiss an adversary complaint. The complaint, filed by Ace American Insurance Company and Pacific Employers Insurance Company (Ace/Pacific) against the Michigan Defendants and Delphi Corporation, sought a declaration on the scope of insurance coverage for workers' compensation policies. The Michigan Defendants argued sovereign immunity and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Ace/Pacific cross-appealed, seeking affirmation of the Bankruptcy Court's decision on sovereign immunity. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's order, finding that it had subject matter jurisdiction, including post-confirmation jurisdiction, and that sovereign immunity was abrogated by the Constitutional Convention in bankruptcy proceedings to effectuate in rem jurisdiction.

Bankruptcy LawSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionCore ProceedingsPost-confirmation JurisdictionDeclaratory Judgment ActionWorkers' CompensationInsurance CoverageChapter 11 ReorganizationEstate Administration
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

World Touch Gaming, Inc. v. Massena Management, LLC

Plaintiff World Touch Gaming, Inc. sued Massena Management, LLC, Akwes-asne Mohawk Casino, and St. Regis Mohawk Tribe for breach of contract related to lease and sales agreements for gaming machines. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint citing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to the Tribe's sovereign immunity. The court found that the Tribe and its enterprise, the Casino, enjoy sovereign immunity, which was not effectively waived by the Management Company's Senior Vice President. Despite explicit waiver language in the agreements, the Tribe's constitution and civil judicial code dictate that only the Tribal Council can expressly waive sovereign immunity, which it did not do. Consequently, the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss against the Tribe and the Casino. Furthermore, the Management Company was also dismissed from the suit as the Tribe and the Casino were deemed indispensable parties under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b).

Contract DisputeSovereign ImmunityTribal LawIndian Gaming Regulation ActBreach of ContractMotion to DismissSubject Matter JurisdictionAgency LawWaiver of ImmunityIndispensable Parties
References
13
Case No. ADJ2238226
Regular
Mar 04, 2013

JUDINE JACOBS vs. RIVERSIDE-SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the dismissal of an applicant's claim, finding it lacked jurisdiction due to Indian tribal sovereign immunity. The applicant, a nurse, claimed a psyche injury while employed by Riverside-San Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc. (RSB). RSB, despite being incorporated under California law, was deemed a governmental entity linked to tribes and serving federal policy, thus entitled to sovereign immunity. The Board found no evidence of an explicit waiver of this immunity.

Tribal sovereign immunityWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndian Healthpsyche injurynursefindings and orderjurisdictionpetition for reconsiderationreport and recommendationadministrative law judge
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Figueroa v. Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Sweden

Carlos Figueroa, an Office Clerk/Chauffeur for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden and the Permanent Mission of Sweden to the United Nations, filed claims for personal injury, retaliation, and discrimination. The defendants sought dismissal based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The Court found the plaintiff's employment, primarily as a chauffeur for diplomats, to be a governmental function, thus granting sovereign immunity for the discrimination and retaliation claims. However, the Court denied dismissal for a breach of a separate tolling agreement, deeming it a commercial activity not subject to immunity. The motion for partial dismissal was therefore granted in part and denied in part.

Foreign Sovereign Immunities ActCommercial Activity ExceptionEmployment DiscriminationRetaliation ClaimsBreach of ContractDiplomatic ImmunitySovereign ImmunityChauffeur EmploymentGovernmental FunctionSwedish Mission
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bohmer v. New York

Todd Bohmer, a New York State Trooper, sued the City of New York, NYPD, Queens DA, State of New York, NYSP, and individual NYSP defendants. Bohmer alleged unlawful wiretapping by City defendants and subsequent use of this evidence by State defendants in a non-criminal disciplinary hearing, asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, along with state claims. The State defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, arguing sovereign immunity, issue preclusion, and failure to state a constitutional violation. The court granted the State defendants' motion, dismissing all claims against New York State, NYSP, and state officials in their official capacity due to sovereign immunity. Individual State defendants (Bennett, Valle, Bruen) were granted absolute immunity for their roles in the quasi-judicial disciplinary hearing. Claims against Loszinski and Hawker were dismissed for failure to state a claim. The court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the pendent state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice.

Civil Rights42 U.S.C. § 1983Fourth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessUnlawful Search and SeizureWiretap EvidencePolice Disciplinary HearingSovereign ImmunityAbsolute Immunity
References
41
Case No. ECF No. 18
Regular Panel Decision

Alexander v. State University of New York at Buffalo

Plaintiff, a hearing-impaired student, sued the State University of New York at Buffalo for failing to provide reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. She alleged the university did not provide a functional FM system, a verbatim transcript service (CART), or adequate note-takers, leading her to withdraw. The university moved for summary judgment, arguing sovereign immunity for ADA claims and denying deliberate indifference for the Section 504 claim. The court found that New York waived sovereign immunity for Section 504 claims by accepting federal funds post-Garcia. The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment, ruling that material issues of fact existed regarding deliberate indifference.

Americans with Disabilities ActRehabilitation ActDisability DiscriminationReasonable AccommodationHearing ImpairmentSummary JudgmentDeliberate IndifferenceSovereign ImmunityPublic ServicesHigher Education
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tiraco v. New York State Board of Elections

Plaintiff Joseph E. Tiraco filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the New York State Board of Elections, the Board of Elections in the City of New York, and Frank MacKay, alleging constitutional violations related to ballot access. He claimed the Boards failed to provide necessary information and discriminatorily hindered his candidacy. The State Board moved to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity, and the City Board moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court granted both motions, dismissing claims against the State Board due to sovereign immunity and against the City Board for lack of plausible due process, First Amendment associational rights, and equal protection claims. Leave to replead was denied.

Election LawCivil Rights42 U.S.C. 1983First AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue Process ClauseEqual Protection ClauseSovereign ImmunityEleventh AmendmentBallot Access
References
72
Case No. 13-CV-7588 (RWS)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 2014

New York State Court Clerks Ass'n v. Unified Court System

The New York State Court Clerks Association and Monica Shaw Burns filed a lawsuit against several New York State Judges, the Unified Court System (UCS), and the Office of Court Administration (OCA), alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) due to uncompensated overtime work. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint, citing Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. The court granted the motions, ruling that the Eleventh Amendment bars claims against UCS, OCA, and the State Judges in their official capacities, as Congress did not abrogate state sovereign immunity under the FLSA. The court also found that plaintiffs failed to adequately allege that the State Judges were 'employers' under the FLSA's 'economic reality' test, and that employees cannot seek injunctive relief under FLSA. Consequently, the amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

Overtime WagesFair Labor Standards ActEleventh Amendment ImmunitySovereign ImmunityDeclaratory Judgment ActMotion to DismissSubject Matter JurisdictionState Judicial OfficialsOfficial Capacity SuitEconomic Reality Test
References
63
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Friedar v. Government of Israel

Samuel Friedar, a New York citizen, sued the Government of Israel and its branches for failing to compensate him for medical costs and expenses incurred after being injured while serving in the Israeli Army in 1948. Friedar alleged breach of contract, intentional withholding of information, negligent loss of files, and wrongful conversion of funds. The Government moved to dismiss, claiming sovereign immunity under 28 U.S.C. § 1604 and that the action was barred by the Act of State doctrine. The Court found that the Government was entitled to sovereign immunity, rejecting Friedar's arguments for exceptions based on waiver or commercial activity. Furthermore, even if jurisdiction existed, the Court would dismiss the case under the Act of State doctrine, citing the impropriety of reviewing a foreign state's internal administrative activity, especially regarding military and veterans' benefits. The Government’s motion to dismiss was granted.

Sovereign ImmunityAct of State DoctrineMotion to DismissForeign Sovereign Immunities ActFSIAGovernmental ImmunityCommercial Activity ExceptionVeterans' BenefitsJurisdictionInternational Law
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 435 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational